He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

  • John Stuart Mill
  • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
    14·
    24 days ago

    I don’t have an answer to your question, but I love your John Stuart Mill quote. I’ve just had a barrage of comments trying to rip me apart for suggesting that a political opponent’s position should be understood; and no comprehension of the point this quote puts across really well.

    • infinite_ass@leminal.space
      4·
      23 days ago

      The membership of Lemmy is overly-emotional, flibbertigibbety infants, as a rule. It’s disheartening. It’s the mainstream. Bobbleheads as far as the eye can see.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      24 days ago

      I’ve just had a barrage of comments trying to rip me apart for suggesting that a political opponent’s position should be understood

      Ironically, I’ve never understood the mindset of those commenters. How can you argue against something, or even know if you should argue against it, without knowing what “it” even is?

      I generally go a step further than believing that every argument should be understood, and say that every argument should be considered as well. You shouldn’t reject an argument purely because it gives you bad vibes. If it’s obviously wrong, it should be obvious why it’s wrong. In practice you don’t always have time to engage with someone promoting obviously dumb ideas, but you should at least yourself know why you consider them to be wrong. I call this “radical possibilism” because you always consider the possibility that an argument is correct.

      • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
        2·
        24 days ago

        You might like this podcast: https://youarenotsosmart.com/

        This guy has done a lot of great work in trying to understand how conspiracy thinking works, how minds can change, how arriving at a state of “knowing” is an emotional state (and not a rational one), how biases change people thinking, etc.

    • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
      3·
      24 days ago

      Glad you liked it, It’s one of my favourites.

      Sorry about the barrage of unfun comments. The internet is so wonderful and so goddamn annoying at the same time eh?

      • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
        4·
        24 days ago

        Thanks. Comments don’t really bother me. It would be a hard life trying to use social media without thick skin.

        But your quote came at a good time to make the point I was looking to make.

        For your question about news, I would highly recommend using an RSS app. Whichever news source you use, its much better when you get your news in time order instead of their stupidly curated website front pages.

          • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
            1·
            24 days ago

            I only use it on android, but there are RSS apps on every platform.

            I think Pluma is the best.

            Of you care about it being free and open source, then “Read You” on f-droid.

            If you search for RSS on any app store it will give you lots of options and you can look through screenshots to see what you like.

        • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
          2·
          24 days ago

          RSS is a great idea, not sure why I haven’t done that. Maybe I’ll set one up this weekend!

          Thanks!